0

Does the person who is given permission to sign as the "Authorized Signature" (at the bottom of the bank check) have to sign exactly as the real Authorized Signer or just use one's own style to sign as the Authorized Signature?

  • 2
    Hi, welcome to law.SE! Unfortunately, your question is unclear: You write about "the person given permission to sign" - what do you mean by that? Do you know that the owner of the checking account allowed someone else to sign checks on their behalf? Then you write about a "forgery" (which would be a criminal offence). So what exactly is the situation? I rather looks like you are asking two different questions. – sleske Feb 21 at 7:46
2

Does the person who is given permission to sign as the "Authorized Signature" (at the bottom of the bank check) have to sign exactly as the real Authorized Signer or just use one's own style to sign as the Authorized Signature?

The bigger question is whether a signature on a check made with the permission of someone who is allowed by the bank to sign the check can do so?

The answer is that this is not legally allowed.

But, if the person who is allowed to sign the check ratifies this conduct, it isn't necessarily a violation of the contract with the bank or laws related to signing checks that would give rise to civil liability, and is unlikely to be prosecuted criminally. If the person authorized to sign ratified a check signed by someone not authorized to sign the check, that check would still be binding against the person who ratified this action.

The legitimate way to proceed would be to have the person authorized to sign the checks authorize someone else to sign them as a convenience signer in the agreement with the bank, or to provide signed blank checks to someone who is allowed to incur funds by the authorized signer.

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.